Supreme Court today weighs whether to allow a shareholder lawsuit against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac related to the government takeover of the mortgage firms amid the 2008 financial crisis
Separately, the court is considering whether the structure of the FHFA, which overseas the two firms, is unconstitutional because the president's ability to remove the director is limited
Earlier this year the court said the similar structure at the CFPB was unconstitutional, so a similar outcome might be expected here
In other words, the Supreme Court could end up making it easier for Biden to appoint his own people to run CFPB and FHFA
Today's argument is scheduled for 90 minutes which means it will take 2 hours plus
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Not surprisingly, a lot of misinformation is being spread about what the Supreme Court actually did. Bottom line: not a single justice said that the four states should be blocked from participating in the electoral college vote as Texas wanted
And, second: Trump and allies have had weeks to pursue their legal claims in state and federal courts and have lost at every stage. They have not just had their day in court, they’ve had weeks in court, and have failed to sustain any of the wild allegations they have made
After the election, other Republicans said Trump had a right to pursue his claims and see if anything sticks. Nothing has stuck. What do they say now?
BREAKING: Supreme Court rejects Texas-led effort to toss out election results in four key states that Biden won
The court in a brief order said Texas did not have standing to bring the claim
Two justices, Thomas and Alito, said as a technical matter they would have allowed the lawsuit to be filed but, as Alito noted, "would not grant other relief," which presumably refers to the request for an injunction that would block states from participating in Electoral College
Supreme Court justices have their last scheduled private meeting of the year this morning to discuss new cases to take up. Texas had asked that they discuss its election lawsuit and related motions. It’s possible the court acts today
The court could also announce cases it is taking up to hear early next year & whether there’s a chance of rulings next week
One of the cases the Supreme Court could act on today is also election-related: a bid by Kansas to revive a law that requires people to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote
"What Texas is doing in this proceeding is to ask this court to reconsider a mass of baseless claims about problems with the election that have already been considered, and rejected, by this court and other courts," PA attorney general says
The Texas lawsuit is a "seditious abuse of the judicial process," PA AG says
One likely contender is the fast-tracked case concerning the Trump administration's vague & possibly unattainable plan to exclude illegal immigrants from census totals used to calculate House of Representatives district. Court could find lawsuit was premature